From Language to Cultural Heritage

The common language of the ancient populations for which it is used the denomination Proto-Indo-European, was most certainly the vehicle for religious, social and moral concepts, in one word, what it can be called the Indo-European culture. At the beginning of the 18th Century the contact with the Hindu culture and the discovery of the Sanskrit languages opened up a renewed interest for language and mythology. As it is well known, in his famous address from 1786 Sir William Jones expressed his marvel over the Sanskrit language structure, more perfect and refined than the Greek or the Latin ones, and yet having verbal and grammatical relations with both. Once this path opened linguists struggled to reconstruct a pre-historic common language based on the hypothesis that all derive from it. The relations between various names of deities became obvious, and as a consequence, the mythological structures received a lot of attention. Discussions centered on the names and functions of divinities, and similarities between mythological themes led to the application of comparative method of research, and the development of comparative mythology as an independent field. The ancient documents of the Hindus, the Persians, the Greeks, the Italics, and the Celts became important sources for this new science, proving that the large pool of common beliefs and customs could have survived over times, hidden in the European and Indo-Iranian folkloric traditions. The difficult task of unearthing and reevaluating elements of culture belonging to these populations could lead to uncover new aspects on the history and culture of our ancestors, but could also lead to exaggerations. The comparative method uses the dimension of a certain cultural form, in our case that of Indo-European mythologies already known and individually studied, by a process of comparing and analyzing elements of myth and folklore from these different cultures. This method operates with sets of simple corresponding structures, named here mythical motifs, which can be followed and compared among many cultures.

The inherent need of human intellect to apprehend the origins of everything dominates the mind from conceptualizing creation myths to rationalizing theories about myth formation and function.

Many researchers agree that “myth… is the counterpart of ritual; myth implies ritual, ritual implies myth, they are one and the same.” (E. R. Leach 1954: 13-14), while others may not agree that myth derives from ritual or the other way around, but are essentially connected. G. Kirk recommends cautiousness when associating myth and ritual as their “relations are complex and varied…” but if mythical and folkloric material cooperate the story, rite-myth gets validation. (Kirk 1970:16-17) Earlier, V. Propp (1957) extended the field maintaining that fairy tales are the text that accompanied rituals.

The anthropological studies own much to B. Malinowski who commended Frazer’s work; he was of the opinion that as a principle of order myth’s primary function was of the recording and validating the social institutions. B. Malinovski thinks that: “Myth fulfills in primitive culture an indispensable function: it expresses, enhances and codifies belief, it safeguards and enforces morality; it vouches for the efficiency of ritual and contains practical rules for the guidance of man” (Malinovski 1955: 101). On a similar note, G. Dumezil based his studies on the idea that myths reflect the social structures of a society. As the author of the tripartite theory Dumezil believed that classical myth reflected ideology and social institutions of the Indo-European society based on three social classes.

Myth embodies a complex cultural phenomenon documenting the way archaic societies functioned,even if it was often been simplified as a story dealing with gods, or as the story behind the ritual. Despite the literal meaning of the Greek word ‘mythos’, something that cannot really exist, fable or fiction, scholars reasoned that people in archaic societies believed myths were ‘true’ and ‘sacred’ stories. By recounting the beginning of things, by offering exemplary models of human behavior, these stories gave meaning to life. (Pettazzoni 1954: 11-36) For Mircea Eliade myth is the narration of a sacred story of an event that happened in primordial times, when supernatural beings took part in the creation of the cosmos, the immediate surroundings, and the social institutions. Thus, myth is relating a ‘true story’, in which supernatural beings were involved in primordial actions, in a primordial time, describing the spring of divine force. M. Eliade argues that by knowing the origin of things man believed he could control and influence them, and by recreating the primordial actions through rituals, he believed that such reenactments will immerse him in the powers of the divine. Myths, Eliade states, describe exemplary models of all significant human activities that were revealed by divine beings or by the mythical forefathers during the course of an acting ritual. “Through myth and symbols the world is no longer an opaque mass of objects thrown arbitrarily together, but a live and meaningful cosmos.” (Eliade 1963) Preoccupied with the structure of the religious conscience, M. Eliade analyzes myth from the perspective of ‘homo religious’. Together with Cassirer, he attributes myth a religious dimension. As a philosopher, Emil Cassirer’s brings in a different perspective on myth when he states: “Thus the attempt is made again and again to make soul mythology or nature mythology, sun or moon or thunder mythology the basis of mythology as such. But even if one of these attempts should prove successful, this would not solve the real problem which mythology presents to philosophy [….] For mythical formulation [….] remains the same miracle of the spirit and the same mystery [….]” And he continues: “But if pure philosophy is necessarily restricted to a general, theoretical picture of such an evolution, it may be that philology and comparative mythology can fill in the outline draw with firm, clear strokes what philosophical speculation could only suggestively sketch.” (Cassirer 1979: 11) He compares the mythic discourse with the philosophic and religious one, arguing that we could not establish, within the development of human culture, the moment when myth ceased to exist and religion began, and thus myth could have been, from its initial form, potentially religion. In agreement with these researchers, I consider approaching myth as the spiritual religious evidence of the archaic societies that could help us to better understand themdespite the difficulties created by time and alterations.

To end this very limited display of previous attempts to define myth, it appears that each offers a valid observation, for instance, it may be true that human beings were impressed by the surrounding nature, since they were dependent on it in every aspect of their life; however, the belief that nature is the sole source of mythical thinking, ignores the other aspects of this subject. The same can be said of social structures, which cannot be considered as basis for the creation of myth without the natural phenomena and the psyche. Most certainly, rituals played an important part in their relation to myth, but careful examinationis needed to clarify if myth is the story of a ritual, or ritual is the result of myth. There are many stories that may describe a ritual only to bring together certain motifs for a more complex purpose. Rituals operated with specific sets of controlled visual and verbal expressions of human values.Physical actions associated with rituals were conveyed into verbal forms of expressions. The story telling uses language tropes, symbols, metaphors, allegories and alike, elements of communication capable to amplify the abstract and religious thoughts imbedded within the cultural heritage. The spoken word sits at the core of the pre-historic mindset for whom stories gained sacred value as it was uttered by the mouth of the storyteller, it became alive and powerful, carrying sacred forces, it developed an independent existence, it influenced man’s destiny and gods’ decisions, it became myth.

AUTHOR:

Definitioner

a¹ (variant ah) (interj.) - exclamation of pain, of wonder, etc.
According to Cioranescu (2), it is of imitative origin.
Although it may be considered of imitative origin, it appears in many other Indo-European languages; cf. Sanskrit ā ‘exclamation of wonder’, Greek ά‘exclamation of indignation, pain’, Latin ā, āh ‘exclamation of pain, indignation, displeasure’, Gothic ō ‘exclamation of pain”, Lithuanian á ‘exclamation of pain’, all from Proto-Indo-European [hence PIE] *ā ‘exclamation of wonder’ (IEW, 1).
a² (Aromaniana ‘to, at’) (prep.) – to, at, next to.
Today it has a restricted use being replaced byla ‘id’ (seela).
Latin ad (Puşcariu, 1; Candrea-Densusianu, 1; REW, 136; Cioranescu, 1).
In Old Romanian, it was used in all situations where today it is used la: “şezu a dereapta lui Dumnezeu” (He sat on the right side of God) (Coresi; cf. Cioranescu), frequently found at the chroniclers, such as Dosoftei and other authors of 16th-17th centuries. Although today it is not used as much as several centuries ago, it is found in syntactical structures such as “miroase a flori’ (it smells like flowers) or a-casă ((at) home).
The forms of the so-called genitival article are compound forms of preposition a and the definite article ( -a, -l, -i, -le). This can be seen in noun phrases with a numeral such as “mamă a trei copii (mother of three)”, etc. since numerals do not take definite articles. A similar situation is found in Aromanian, where the so-called genitival article of Daco-Romanian is not expressed, but the genitive contructions are marked by the preposition a only, which is considered (definite) article by T. Papahagi (49), but he was wrong about it. The same phenomenon is found in some Romance and other languages .
It derives from with PIE *ad ‘at, next to’ (IEW, 3); cf. Oscan az ‘at’ Gaulish ad ‘at’, Welsh add ‘d’, Gothicat ‘at, next to’, OHG az ‘at, next to’.
abạc (n., neut.) – abacus, counting frame.
From Italian abbaco ‘id’ > Neo-Greek άμπάκος (Gáldi, Les mots, 143) or from French abaque (Cioranescu, 5).
abanọs (n., masc.) – ebony, ebony tree.
Turkish abanos ‘id’ > Neo-Greek αμπάνος (Roesler, 587; Şăineanu, 2, 5; REW, 2816; Cioranescu, 7); cf. Albanian abanos ‘id’, Bulgarian abanos‘id’. It is of Semitic origin which was borrowed into Medio-Greek and Medieval Latin (hebenus) and from Latin into (most) European languages.
abạte (vb., III) (Aromanian abat ‘id’) – 1. to turn off, aside, away; 2. to push or drive away; 3. to desuade (from).
Medieval Latin abbattere(Puşcariu, 2; REW, 1; Cioranescu, 8).
It is a derivative of Romanian language from a bate ‘to beat’, prefixed with a, an usual method of verb derivation in Romanian (as one may see throughout this dictionary). In fact, the verb abate has various meanings. Latin abbatere ‘to descend, to supress’ is not attested before 6th century AD. Its first attestation is found in the Salic Law (507-511) (cf. Niermeyer, 1,1), a legal code based on old Germanic traditions, formulated by Salic Franks (see bate).
abiạ (Aromanian avia) (adv.) – 1. hardly; 2. scarcely, very little, next to nothing; 3. only, just, merely.
Latin *ad-vix < vix ‘just, hardly’ (Philippide, Principii, 91; Puşcariu, 3; Candrea-Densusianu, 224; Cioranescu, 12) or from OCS abije ‘immediately’ (Cihac) which is semantically different from Romanian abia.
Romanian abia is a cognate of Latin vix, but it cannot derive from it, nor from unattested *ad-vix which would yield in Romanian *avis, or *abis, but not abia. On the other hand, it has no cognates in other Romance languages.
In order to explain the origin of Latinvix,Walde (2, 810) argues that it derives from a PIE *ŭiqŭ-s ‘heavy, overwhelming’ which, he believes, is cognate with Greekιπόω ‘to lie heavily on, to squeeze’. If he is right, then Romanian abiamay derive form the same (or similar) root as Latin vix. In this case the labio-velarkŭ turned into voiceless labial p, a frequent phonological transformation in Thraco-Dacian (see Argument to DELR). Afterwards, it turned into the voiced bi-labialb.
abitịr (adv.) (obs.) – much better, stronger.
Turkish better ‘worse’ (Cioranescu, 14) or Turkishabeter, the comparative form of abe ‘clear’ (Şăineanu, 2, 6; DAR). Cioranescu rejects this hypothesis, although it is much more plausible than his. It is used, in general, with the comparative adverb mai ‘more’.
abrạş(Aroumanian abraşcu„insolent, impertinent”) (adj.) – 1. vicious, restive (about horses); 2. wicked, violent (about people).
Turkish abraş (Şăineanu, 2, 7; Cioranescu, 21). Şăineanu believes that Turkish borrowed it from Arabic. I have to mention that the word is found in Albanianabrash and Bulgarian abraš as well.
In fact, this adjective cannot be of Turkish or Arabic origin since there are several cognates in various Indo-European languages. It derives from PIE *abhro- ‘strong, violent’ (IEW, 2); cf. Welsh afr ‘very’, Illyrian tribe name Abroi, Thracian Abro- (in personal names), Gothic abrs ‘strong, violent’, English brash. Therefore, it seems that Turkish borrowed it from Romanian or other Balkan language. Thraco-Illyrian origin.
Abrụd– town in Transylvania.
This place-name is attested since ancient times as Abruttum, the ancient name of this city (cf. Giurescu, 1, 125). Thraco-Dacian origin.
abuạ (vb., I)– to fall asleep, to sleep.
A regionalism (Transylvania) avoided by the authors of etymological dictionaries.
It derives form PIE *au-, au-es-, au-s- ‘to stay overnight, to sleep’ (IEW, 72); cf. Armenian aganim ‘to stay overnight, to spend the night’, Greek ιαύω ‘to sleep’. In Thraco-Dacian PIE *u turned into v or b at initial or in intervocalic position (see vatră). Thraco-Dacian origin.
aburcạ (vb., I) – to climb, to go up.
From Latin *arboricare < arbor (Puşcariu, ZRPh., 31, 616; DAR; REW, 606). Cioranescu (29) rejects Puşcariu’s hypothesis and proposes *aboricare < *boricare < *oricare, from Latin orior ‘to climb’. Romanian aburca is cognate to Latin orior, but in fact, it is a derivative of aurca ‘to go up, to mount, to ascend (prefixed with ab-) from PIE *er-, *or- ‘to set in motion, to go up, to rise’ (IEW, 326); cf. Hittite šark ‘to climb, to go up’, Sanskrit abhy-uccar ‘to go up, to climb’, Avestan ar ‘to set in motion’, Greek όρνυμι ‘to move, to rise’ (seeurca). Thraco-Dacian origin.
ạbur(Aromanian abur) (n., masc.) – steam, vapor.
It was considered to be of Thraco-Dacian origin since Miklosich (Slaw. Elem., 9), although some other linguists after him believed to be a loan-word from Albanian abull ‘id’ (Cihac, 2, 714; Philippide, 2, 605, Meyer, EWA, 28). Instead Cioranescu (28) wants for it a Latin origin, namely form Latin albulus ‘white spot’. These two hypotheses were rejected by other linguists.
Later on, in the second half of the 20th century, Brâncuş (VALR, 28) shows that it is of Thraco-Dacian origin. I have to mention that today, most linguists consider it of Thraco-Dacian origin. Indeed, it derives from PIE *bholo- ‘stem, fog’ (IEW, 162) through an older *ad-bolo > Romanian abur; cf.Albanian avull „id” (Gheg dialect), abull ‘id’ (Tosk dialect). The root is found in other Indo-European languages; cf. Sanskrit busa ‘steam, fog’, Old Irish boladh ‘smell’, Lithuanianbula ‘fog, steam’, Latvian buls ‘id’. Thraco-Illyrian origin (see boare ‘breeze’,bură ‘drizzle, fog’).
Derivatives: aaburi, abureală, aburire, aburos.
ac(Aromanian ac) (n., neut.) – needle, sting.
Latin acus ‘wheat husk, needle’ (Puşcariu, 6; Candrea-Densusianu, 3; REW, 130, Cioranescu, 30).
The root is found in words of many Indo-European languages from PIE *ak’-, ok’- ‘sharp’ (IEW, 18); cf. Greek αχυρός, OHG ahir, Gothic ahana, akeit‘vinegar’, Old Icelandicogni, Lithuanian akutas, OCS ociti, Old Irish acat ‘vinegar’,as well as Greek άκρος ‘mountian tip’, Greek ακή, ακμήv ‘top’, Old Latinocris ‘hill’, Umbrian ukar, ucar ‘hill’. The root is found in other Romanian words as well (see acru ‘sour’, oţet ‘vinegar’).
acadeạ (n., fem.) (obs.) – a candy made of melted sugar.
Turkish akıde ‘id’ < Arabic akīda (Şăineanu, 2, 7; Cioranescu, 31).
acạsă(Aromanian acasă) (adv.) – home, at home.
It is a derivative of casă ‘house’ prefixed with preposition a² (see a² and casă).
acatịst (n., neut.) – 1. hymn and mass honoring Virgin Mary and saints. 2. a list of names of people given to the priest to pray for them.
Greek ακάθιστος ‘id’ < καθίζω ‘to lie down’ with a privative α, because such hymns are sung standing (cf. Cioranescu, 36).
Derivatives: acatistier ‘a book of such hymns’.
acătặrii(variants acătarea, acătărea, acătare) (adj.) – 1. good, beautiful, nice; 2. appropriate.
There are several hypotheses regarding the origin of this word: from Latin *ad-que-tale (Cipariu, Gram.,2, 60) or de cătare (Philippide, Principii, 8) or de atare(Puşcariu, 8) and finally from Latin *eccum talis (Cioranescu, 35). None of these solutions can be accepted for various reasons. The Latin ‘etymons’ are not plausible compounds, without any correspondent forms in other Romance languages, while de cătare and de atare do not explain the presence of initial a and the elision of preposition de. It should be associated with the verb acăuta ‘to look for, to search’ from PIE *keu-, skeu- „to look at, to observe” (IEW, 587) (seecăuta).
acăţạ(variant a agăţa, Aromanian acaţu) (vb., I) – 1. to hang (up), to hook up.
Latin *accaptiare<captiare ‘to catch, to try to catch’ (Philippide, Principii, 43; Puşcariu, Lat. ti, 12; Candrea-Densusianu, REW, 1663). Even if we admit the existence of a Latin *accaptiare, one cannot explain why pt turned into t or ţ (ts). The root is found in other Balkan languages; cf. Bulgarian kacja and kace(kacja) ‘bramble’ or Hittite aggati ‘a catching net’. Other Romanian words such as caţă ‘a catching tool’, căţăra ‘to climb, to clamber’ derive form the same root. Thus we may reconstruct IE *kati- ‘to hang up, to catch’ (seecaţă,căţăra). Thraco-Dacian origin.
acẹl, acẹla(Aromanian aţel) (dem. pron.) – that.
Lat. *ecce illi, *ecce illa (Diez, I, 337; Puşcariu, 9; Candrea-Densusianu, 532; REW, 4266). This hypothesis cannot be accepted. Romanian acel(a) is a derivative of ăl(a) prefixed with ac- found in other compound form (see acest(a) ‘this’, acum ‘now’, aici ‘here’,aşa ‘thus’).
Romanian ăl seems to derive from PIE *al-,ol- (cf. IEW, 24), not form Latin ille, illum. The root reconstructed by Walde-Pokorny does not explain -ll- of Latinille, neither OCS onŭ, Lithuanian ans, Armenian na, ayn, OHG ener. Therefore, PIE root *ol-ne, reconstructed by Ernout-Meillet explains much better all the forms mentioned above and the definite article in Celtic languages; cf. Irish an, Bretonan,ar, al, Welsh y, yr. On the other hand, Romanianăl is closer to Umbrian ulu, ulo ‘illuc’ and Oscan ulas ‘illius’ then to Latin ille (see a³, ăl, acest).
acerạ (variants acira, acina) (reg.) (vb., I) – 1. to wait; 2. to watch (Banat).
Latin *acinari (Graur, BL, 4, 64; Cioranescu, 45). Latin acinari has no attestation. On the other hand, Puşcariu (Dacor., 2, 592) thinks that it derives from Albanian kjëlloni „to take care”, but the derivation it is not possible, althoguh this Albanian verb is a cognate of Romanian acera. It seems to be of Thraco-Illyrian origin.
acẹst,acẹsta(variant ăsta, Aromanianaţestu, aest(ŭ)) (dem. pron.) - this.
Latin iste, ista, istud ‘id’ (Puşcariu, 11; Candrea-Densusianu, 13; REW, 4553; Cioranescu, 46). Romanian acest(a) is a derivative of ăsta ‘this’ which is rather a cognate of Latin iste. Again Roamania ăsta comes closer to Umbrian estu ‘istum’, esto ‘ista’; cf. Albanian kë-to ‘this’.
acioạie (variant cioaie) (n., fem.) – bronze, yellow brass.
Italian acciaio ‘steel’ (Hasdeu, Etym.; DAR; Cioranescu, 49). Candrea and Scriban reject this hypothesis, although Hasdeu seems to be right.
aciuạ (variant aciuia, aciola, acina) (vb., I) – to hide, to shelter.
OCS utečati ‘to run’ (Cihac, 9). Latin *acellare < Latin cella ‘hiding place’ (Philippide, ZRPh., 31, 287; Puşcariu, Conv. lit., 1908, 602; REW, 1802; DAR), Latin *accubiliare (Candrea-Densusianu, 10) or Latin cieri ‘to incite, to call’ (Cioranescu, 50).
All four hypotheses are inadequate, either phonologically or semantically. Although Philippide is partially right, since Latin cella ‘hiding place’ is cognate to Romanian aciua.
Romanian aciua derives from PIE *k’el- ‘to cover, to hide’, with the nominal from k’olia ‘cover, hiding place’ (IEW, 553); cf. Latin cilium ‘eyelid’, Gothic hulian ‘to hide’, Old Norse hulia, OHG hullen ‘to cover’. The noun acioală ‘hiding place’ derives fromk’olia and the verbal form aciola seems to be a derivative ofacioală. All these forms present an initial a, one of the derivation method found in Romanian languages. From the same root derive some other Romanian words without an initial a (see colibă ‘hut’ colnă‘a rudimentary shelter for animals or farming tools’, şoric ‘pork skin’). Thraco-Dacian origin.
acọlo(variants acole, acolea, acoló,colo,Aromanianacló, aclói aclóţe, Istro-Romanian colo etc.) (adv.) – there, over there.
Latin *eccum illoc (Philippide, Principii, 92; Puşcariu, 15; Candrea-Densusianu, 12; REW, 4270; Cioranescu, 54). As in the case of aici (aci) ‘here’ and Romanian demonstrative pronouns, adverbs and prepositions, acolo cannot derive from some strange Latin compound.
Romanian acolo derives from PIE *kʷel-‘far away (in space or time’ (IEW, 640). Bomhard (316) reconstructs a Proto-Nostratic*kʷ(h)ul-, *kʷ(h)ol- ‘far off, far away, distant’; cf. Greek τήλε ‘far off, far away’ and Welsh, Cornish, Breton pell„far away”, as well as in the Altaic family: cf. Classical Mongolian qola ‘far, distant’, Buriat χolo ‘far, distant’ (see acel, acest, încoace, încolo). Thraco-Dacian origin.
acoperị(variant coperi, Aromanian acoapir) (vb., I) – 1. to cover; 2. to hide.
Latin cooperire ‘to cover’ (Puşcariu, 395; Candrea-Densusianu, 307; REW, 2205; Cioranescu, 2379). In Latin, cooperire was much less frequent then operio ‘id’ as opposed toaperio ‘to open’.
It is found in all Romance languages; cf. Italian coprire ‘id’, French couvrir ‘id’, Spanich cubrir ‘id’, Vegliote koprer ‘id’ etc. Only Romanian form has an initiala. Albanian kaplo ‘to cover’ cannot derive form Latin, but it seems it is a cognate of the Romance forms.
Both Latin forms o-perio and a-perio derive from the same PIE *uerio (Ernout-Meillet), found also in Italic, Baltic, Slavic and Sanskrit languages; cf. Osco-Umbrian veru ‘door’, Lithuanian už-veriu ‘to close’, ad-veriu ‘to open’, OCS vira, vreti ‘to close’ and Sanskrit apavrnoti ‘to open”’(III, sg.), apivrnoti ‘to close’ (III, sg.).
Derivatives: acoperire, acoperământ, acoperiş, acoperitor.
ạcru(Aromanian, Megleno-Romanian acru ‘sour’) (adj.) – sour.
Vulgar Latin *acrus < Latin acer ‘sharp, enthusiastic, violent’ (Puşcariu, 15; Candrea-Densusianu, 13; REW, 92; Cioranescu, 59). Cognates are found in all Romance as well as in Albanian egrë ‘sour’.
Latin acer derives from PIE *ak’er, ok’erdin ak-, ok’- ‘sharp’ (IEW, 24).
Derivatives: a acri, acreală, acrişor, acruţ.
acụm(variants acnu, acmu, amu, acu, acuşi, Aromanian amu, amo ‘now’, Megleno-Romanian (a)cmo, amu, mo ‘now’, Istro-Romanian (a)cmo, (a)hmo) ‘now’ (adv.) – now.
Latin *eccum modo (Philippide, Principii, 92; Puşcariu, 18; Candrea-Densusianu, 14; REW, 5630, Cioranescu, 65). The putative Latin ‘etymon’ *eccum modowould have a completely different meaning then Romanian acum. On the other hand, dof modo should not drop off, even more it was not preserved in any of the many forms found in Romanian dialects.
In other words, Latin *eccum modo would give in Romanian *ec(u)mod, but not acmu, acnu, the older forms for ‘now’. Romanian acnu, acmu derive from PIE *nu ‘now’ (IEW, 770), prefixed with ac-. The root is found in many other Indo-European languages; cf. Latin nunc ‘now’, Gothic nu ‘id’, OHG nu ‘id’, Lithuanian nu ‘id’, Tocharian A, B nu ‘id’, Old Irish nu ‘id’, Greek νυ, νυν ‘id’. The prefixac- is quite usual in Romanian in demonstrative pronouns and adverbs (seeacel ‘that’,acest ‘this’,aşa ‘thus’). Traco-Daian origin.
adălmạş (variant aldămaş) (n., neut.) – drink or meal offered after a transaction.
Hungarian adolmás ‘1. toast, blessing; 2. pitcher of wine (fig.)’ (Cihac, II, 475; Berneker, 27, Gáldi, Dict., 86; Cioranescu, 184).
Romanian adălmaş has the same origin as adămană ‘bribery, gift’; cf. Hungarian adomany ‘id’. Poghirc (ILR, 327) associates Romanian adămană with aademeni ‘to allure, to tempt’ and considers it to be of Thraco-Dacian origin (see ademeni). Hungarian borrowed these forms from Romanian. The word is found in some other neighboring languages; cf. Ukrainian odomaš ‘gift’, Serbian aldumaš ‘salary’, Slovak aldomaš ‘salary’. Thraco-Dacian origin.
adăpạ(Aromanian adap, Megleno-Romanian dap, Istro-Romanian adopu) (vb., I) - 1. to give water to an animal; 2. (refl.) to drink water (about an animal).
Latin adaquare ‘to water, to sprinkle’ (Puşcariu, 20; REW, 147; Cioranescu, 69). The form is found only in Italian with the same meaning as in Latin The meaning of Romanian adăpa is found only in Vulgata, the Latin version of Septuaginta. The translation was done by Saint Hyeronymus, around 383 AD at the request of Pope Damasus. Saint Hyeronymus was born and lived part of his life in Illyria (see apă‘water’).
adăstạ(Aromanian adastu) (vb., I) – to stand by, to wait.
Latin *adastare(Puşcariu, 22; REW, 148; Cioranescu, 72). Meyer-Lübke follows Puşcariu and translate Latin *adastare by ‘to wait in line, to hesitate’, while Cioranescu thinks that adastare means ‘to be present’. In fact, this verb has no attestation whatsoever, neither in Ancient Latin (cf. TLL), nor in Medieval Latin (cf. Niermeyer). On the other hand, there are no cognates in any other Romance language.
Romanian adăsta is a derivative of a sta ‘to stay, to stand’ prefixed with the preposition *ad (as inadăpa, adăpost(i), etc), therefore from an older *ad-stare > *adastare ‘to stand by, to wait’ (see sta).
adăugạ(variant adăugi,Aromanianadavg) (vb., I) – to add.
Latin adaugere ‘to make bigger, to add’ (Puşcariu, 10; Candrea-Densusianu, 16; REW, 149; Cioranescu, 68).
Dervatives: adaus, adăugire, adăugare.
adăpọst(n., neut.) – shelter.
Latin ad depositum or *addapostum(Philippide, Principii, 97; Tiktin; Puşcariu, 21; Rosetti, I, 161; Cioranescu, 70) or Latin ad appos(i)tum (Candrea-Densusianu) where appositum derives from appono ‘to put, to place’ from an Old Latin *adponno. All this discussion makes no sense since Old Latin cannot explain any Romanian etymology, unless one considers that a similar form may have existed in Thraco-Illyrian. Uncertain origin.
Derivatives: a adăposti, adăpostire, adăposteală, adăpostitor.
adăuş(adj.) – heavy breathing (about animals) (western Trans.)
The authors of DAR assciate it with Hungarian dühös ‘angry, furious’, but this does make sense since the meaning of the two words are different. This adjective should be associated with adia ‘to breeze’ and duios. It derives PIE *dheu-, *dheu- ‘to breeze, to breathe, breath’ (IEW, 261) prefixed with the preposition *adas adia (see adia, duios). Thraco-Dacian origin.
adậnc (Aromanian adânc, Megleno-Romanian dănca) (adj.) – deep.
Latin aduncus (Puşcariu, 25; Candrea-Densusianu, 17; Tiktin).
Latin aduncus means ‘aquiline, curved’ in reference to body parts such as nose, beak or horns. Spanish adunco has the same meaning as in Latin (cf. Williams, 1988), while Romanian adânc has a completly different meaning. Obviously this hypothesis cannot be accepted. On the other hand, a Latin round vowel cannot turn into a middle or front vowel in Romanian. Because of this, Meyer-Lübke (REW, 144) and Rosetti (ILR, 161) proposed a Vulgar Latin *adancus,but this form has no attestation or any cognates in any other Romance language. In other words, none of these two hypotheses can be accepted.
Romanian adânc may be associated with PIE *dheub-,dheup- *dheug-, *dheuk- ‘deep, hole’, dhumb‘hole or depression into the ground’ (IEW, 267). Romanian adânc seems to derive from *dheuk-, with a later nazal infix as in Celtic languages and prefixation with *ad, therefore a *ad-demk, *ad-denk; cf. Irishdomhain ‘deep’, Welsh dwfn ‘id’, Cornish down ‘id’, Breton doun ‘id’ as well as Gothic diups ‘id’ and Lithuanian dumbaris ‘a deep hole full of water’ can be added as a cognate. Thraco-Dacian origin.
Derivatives: adâncire, adâncime, adâncitură, adâncit.
ademenị(vb., IV)– 1. to atract; 2 to seduce.
Cihac (2, 202) associates it with amomi ‘id’ and OCS mamiti ‘to cheat’. From Hungarian adomany ‘gift, donation’ (DAR; Cioranescu, 73). Instead, Hasdeu considers it to be of Thraco-Dacian origin (Col. lui Traian, 1874, 102). This Romanian verb has the same structure as adăpa, adăpost(i),adăsta, namely a (verbal) root prefixed by preposition *ad. In other words, from an older *admeni. Poghirc (ILR, 327) shows that adămană ‘gift, bribe’ is related to Phrygianάδαμνειυτό(in Hesychius; cf. Hasdeu, Col. lui Traian, 1874, 102). As one may see the Phrygian form is built in the same manner. Pre-Roman origin (seeadălmaş,momi).
Derivatives: ademenire, ademeneală, ademenitor.
adẹs(variants adesea, adeseori) (adv.) – frequently.
It is a compound from from a²şi des (see des).
adevặr(Aromanian aver, Istro-Romanian veru ‘truly’) (n., neut.) – truth.
Vulgar Latin *ad-de-verum (Philippide, Principii, 96; Puşcariu, 24; REW, 9262; Cioranescu, 77).
This Latin ‘etymon’ cannot be accepted. It is not attested anywhere and there are no cognates forms in any Romance language to derive form this putative etymon. The Daco-Romanian and the Aromanian forms indicates an older *adver, from PIE *ŭer- ‘truth’ (Walde, 2, 728) prefixed with the preposition *ad, while Istro-Romanianveru kept the root as it was. The root can be found in many Indo-European languages; cf. Sanskrit ri-vrata ‘the one who tells the truth’, Latin verus ‘true’, OHG war ‘truth’, Irish fir ‘id’, Welsh gwir ‘id’, OCS vera ‘belief’, Avestan vərəne ‘to believe’, as well as Albanian vërtet ‘inded’, vërtetë ‘truth’.
Derivatives: a (se) adeveri, adeverinţă, adeveritor, neadevăr.
adiạ(variant aduia (Trans.) Aromanian adil’iu ‘1. to breathe; 2. to caress’) (vb., I) – 1. to blow, to breeze; 2. to breathe gently; 3. to caress.
Vulgar Latin *aduliare< adulare ‘to adulate, to flatter’ (REW, 204) or Latin *adiliare< ilia ‘intestines’ (Candrea, Conv. lit., 39, 119; Pascu, I, 102). It is obvious that both etymons should be rejected because their meanings are completely different.
Cihac (2, 1) thinks that it derives form Polish odwiač ‘to breathe’, while Scriban associates it with Bulgarian duja and Serbian dujem ‘to breathe’. The Slavic forms are, indeed, cognates to Romanian adia, but it can be derived from any of them, but all these forms derive from PIE *dheu-, *dheu- ‘to breeze, to breathe, breath’ (IEW, 261); cf. Sanskrit apa-dvan ‘to rise’ upa-dvan ‘to fly towards’. The Aromanian form indicates an older *adilio, -are. Again the verbal root is prefixed by preposition *ad. It is related to duios ‘loving, affectionate’ and adăuş ‘heavy breathing’ (see duios,adăuş). Thraco-Dacian origin.
adịcă (variants adecă, adicătăle, adicătălea) (adv.) – 1. namely, strictly speaking; 2. therefore.
For this Romanian word there were proposed some of the most bizarre etymologies.
From Greek δική ‘justice’ (Hasdeu, Etym.; Jarnik, ZRPh., 27; Candrea, Elem., 64) or Latin ad id quod (Philippide, Principii, 7) or even Turkish (Arabic) dakika‘moment, second’ (Lokotsch, 469) and some others not worthy to mention. Obviously, none of these etymologies can be accepted.
Nevertheless, there is a Latin adaeque (ad-aeque) ‘equally, thus’ (in Corpus gloss. lat., 5, 21; cf. Cioranescu, 81) which the Latin verb adaequo ‘to make equal’ derives from (cf. Glare, 1997). On the other hand, Latin adaeque is extremely rare and one cannot tell if it can be associated with Romanian adică. Furthermore, there are not cognates in any Romance languages. However, it may be associated with a zice ‘to say’, since it has a similar meaning with the expression va să zică‘therefore’, although it is not clear why d did not turn into z. Uncertain origin (see zice).
adineạuri(variants adineaori, adineaorea) (adv.) – a little while ago, not too long ago.
Latin in illa hora (Puşcariu, 26; REW, 4146) would give in Romanian *ilioară or *inioară, similar to Italian allora < illa hora. Latin *ad de in illa horam(Puşcariu, 26). This hypothesis does not make any sense. Needless to say that a compound of five Latin elements to ‘explain’ the etymology of a Romanian word cannot be accepted. This adverb should be associated with oară ‘time’ and odinioară (see oară, odinioară).
adịns (variants înadins, dinadins) (adv.) – on purpose, deliberately.
Latin *ad ipsum illum (REW, 4541; DAR) or Latin ad idipsum ‘just for this’ (Cioranescu, 84). In both cases the derivation is not possible. It is a derivative of ins‘individual’ (see ins).
adormị(Aromanian adormu) (vb., IV) – 1. to fall asleep; 2. death, demise (rel.).
Latin addormire ‘to fall asleep’ (Puşcariu, 27; Candrea-Densusianu., 509; REW, 157; Cioranescu, 92) (seedormi ‘to sleep’).
Derivatives: adormire, adormitor, adormiţéle ‘pasqueflowers, morning glories’.
adụce(Aromanian aduc, Megleno-Romanian duc, Istro-Romanian aducu) (vb., III) – 1. to bring; 2. to bend; 3. to be like, to resemble.
Latin adducere ‘to pull’ (Puşcariu, 28; Candrea-Densusianu., 518; REW, 160; Cioranescu, 94); cf. Italian addure, Catalan adur, Spanish aducir (see duce).
Derivatives: aducere, aducătură, adusătură, aducător.
adulmecạ (variants adulma, aulma, olm„smell”, ulma „id”) (vb., I) - 1. to scent, to smell, to sniff, to follow by smell; 2. to sense, to notice.
Latin *adolmicare (Hasdeu, Etym., 386; Puşcariu, 29) or Latin *adosmare (REW, 6112). Cioranescu (95) considers it of obscure origin, but he associates it with Latin *adosmare < Latin *osmare, from Greek οσμάω ‘to sniff, to smell’. None of these hypotheses can be accepted, since the proposed etymons are not attested or there are no cognates in any of the Romance languages. On the other hand, Romanian adulmeca is cognate to Greek οσμάω.
Romanian adulmeca derives from PIE *od- ‘to smell’, *od-ma ‘smell, aroma, perfume’ (IEW, 712); cf. Armenian hot ‘steam, smell’, hotim ‘to smell’, Homeric Greek οδμή, Dorian Greek οδμά ‘steam, smell’, Latin odefacio, olefacio ‘to smell’, oleo ‘to smell, to stink’, Lithuanian ǔodžiu ‘to smell’. It seems that the Romanian verb derives from the nominal form *odma‘smell’. Thraco-Dacian origin.
Derivatives: adulmecare, adulmecător.
adunạ(Aromanian adun, Megleno-Romanian dun, Istro-Romanian aduru) (vb., I) – 1. to gather, to bring together; 2. to heap, to accumulate; 3 to add.
Latin adunare ‘to unite, to bring together’ (Puşcariu, 31; REW, 209; Cioranescu, 97); cf. Italian adunare, Spanish, Catalan, Portuguese aunar. The verbal formadunare is rare in Latin (only in a few Late Latin glosses), while the noun adunatio ‘gathering, reunion’ is found more often.
Derivatives: adunare, adunat, adunătură, adunător.
ạer (Aromanian, Megleno-Romanian aeru) (n., neut.) – 1. air; 2. look, appereance.
Latin aer (Puşcariu, 43; REW, 240; DAR; Cioranescu, 101). Panromanic; cf. Albanian ajër ‘id’. The meaning #2 is borrowed from French. The word itself is not a modern loanword since it is attested in Romanian Balkan dialects.
Derivatives: a aera, aereală, aeresc, aerian, aerisi < Neo-Greek αερίζω, as well as modern loanwords such as aeroplan, aeronaut, aeronavă etc.
afạră(Aromanian afoară) (adv.) – outside, beyond.
Latin ad foras < foras ‘outside’ (Puşcariu, 33; Candrea-Densusianu, 550; REW, 265; Cioranescu, 105); cf. Italian fuori, Old French afors, Spanish afuera.
Walde (1, 529) erroneously derives Latin foris (foras) from PIE *dhuor‘door’.
However, there are similar forms in other Indo-European languages; cf. Albanian afër ‘next, close’, Gothic afar ‘beyond’, Hittite para ‘outside’, Sanskrit apara‘behind, later’, Armenian ap΄n ‘shore’, OHG ufer ‘shore’. All these forms seem to derive from PIE *āpero ‘shore’(IEW, 53).
ạfin(Aromanian afin) (n., masc) – blueberry bush (Vaccinium myrtillus).
Hungarian afonya (Cihac, 2, 475), but Cihac is wrong about it, since the form is found in Aromanian as well, which is spoken in Greece, Albanian and southern Bulgaria and therefore it cannot borrow it form Hungarian. From Latin daphne ‘laurel’ (Herzog, RF, 1, 94-104). In this case, the derivation is not possible, although the two forms are cognates. Romanian afinshould be associated with Calabrian afina ‘laurel’ which seems to be inherited from Oscan language. Latindaphne is a loanword from Greek δάφνη. Chantraine (255) argues that the Greek form is of Mediterranean origin; cf. Micenian dapu. From Romanian it was borrowed into other neighboring languages; cf. Ukrainian jafina ‘id”’, Polishiafira ‘id’, Transylvanian Saxon afunie ‘id’. There is no doubt that Hungarianafonya is a loanword from Romanian as well. Thraco-Dacian origin.
Derivatives: afină, afiniş, afinată.
aflạ(Aromanian aflu, Istro-Romanian oflu) (vb., I) – 1. to find out, to come up with; 2. to hear, to learn.
Latin afflare ‘to breathe’ (Puşcariu, 34; Candrea-Densusianu, 19; REW, 261; Cioranescu, 114). There are similar forms in other Romance languages; cf. Veglioteaflatura, Calabrian ahhare, Spanish haller ‘to find’, Portuguese achar ‘id’, Romansch afla ‘id’.
The meaning of Latin afflare is completely different, therefore, it cannot be the etymon of Romance forms which seems to be of Pre-Roman origin.
Schuchardt (ZRPh., 20, 536) believes that there was a meaning deviation of the expression of mihi afflatur ‘one whispered to me’. Later on, he came up with another hypothesis (ZRPh, 31, 719; 32, 230), arguing that the meaning in Romance languages derives from the hunting jargon, namely the hound ‘find out’ by smelling (by breathing) the prey. I cannnot accept such an “explanation” even if it comes from one of the greatest linguists such as Hugo Schuchardt. Corominas (3, 308) derives Spanich hallar ‘to find’ < Old Spanish falar. from Latin afflare.
A similar verb is found in Medio-Greek άλφειν ‘to search, to look for’, which made Cihac (2, 633) to believe that Romanian aafla is of Greek origin. The Medio-Greek verb may be a loanword from Late Thraco-Dacian or from Proto-Romanian, since it is not attested in ancient Greek. It seems to be of Pre-Roman origin.
Derivatives: aflare, aflător.
afurisị (Aromanian afurisire, Megleno-Romanianfurisit) (vb., I) – 1. to excommunicate, to anathemize; 2. to curse, to damn.
Medio-Greek αφορίζω, aorist αφόρισα ‘id’ (Roesler, 565; Cioranescu, 117); cf. Bulgarian afurisati, Turkish aforoz. From Romanian it was borrowed into Transylvanian Saxon afurisin ‘to curse’.
Derivatives: afurisenie, afurisit.
agạle(Aromanian agale) (adv.) - slowly, step by step.
Neo-Greek αγαλία ‘slowly’ (Meyer, Neugr. St., 4, 6, Gáldi, 141; Cioranescu, 120), which, according to these authors, derives from Italian uguale. Italian ugualemeans ‘equal, same’ and, therefore, cannot be the etymon of these Balkanic forms. There is a similar form with the same meaning in Albanian ngadalë ‘slowly’ which cannot be a loanword from Neo-Greek. Neo-Greek borrowed it from Aromanian. Thraco-Illyrian origin.
agă (n., masc.) (obs.) – 1. high rank military officer in Turkish army.
Turkish aga ‘id’ (Roesler, 587; Şăineanu, II, 10; Cioranescu, 118).
Derivatives: agie (obs.) ‘police headquarters’.
ageamịu (Aromanian ağami, Megleno-Romanian ağamiia) (adj.) – ignorant, incapable.
Turkish acemi < Arabicağam ‘Barbarian’ (Şăineanu, II, 12; Cioranescu, 125); cf. Neo-Greek ατζαμής, Bulgarian ağamija.
ạger– 1. keen, penetrating; 2. active, industrious.
Latin agilis ‘agile’ (Cipariu, Gram., II, 344; Puşcariu, 37; Candrea-Densusianu, 19; REW, 230).
Turkish acar (pron. agear) ‘industrious, keen, penetratating’ seems to be a loanword from Romanian.
Derivatives: a ageri, agerime.
aghiạsmă (variant aiazmă, Aromanian agiazma, Megleno-Romanian ghiasmá) (n., fem.) - holy water.
Medio-Greek αγίασμα ‘id’ (Cioranescu, 129); cf. Albanian ajazmë ‘id’, Bulgarian agiazma ‘id’
Derivatives: a aghesmui ‘to sprinkle with holy water’, aghiazmatar ‘vessel for holy water’.
agâmbạ (vb., I) (dial.) – to hunt, to trample.
Latin gamba (Philippide, II, 643) or from Latin *aggambare (REW, 1529; DAR). Both hypotheses are rejected by Cioranescu (131). He considers it of unknown origin, especially because these “etymons” cannot explain forms such as agâmbeală ‘epilepsy’ and agâmbat ‘poor, unhappy person’.
Romanianagâmbaseems to derive from PIE *gheubh- ‘to curb, to bend’ (Walde, I, 597; IEW, 450) with the epenthesis of m, a frequent phonological phenomenon in Romanian. Similar forms are found in some other neighboring Indo-European languages; cf. Latvian gubtu, gubt ‘to bend, to curb’, Lithuaniangeibus ‘weak’, Greek κυφος ‘curbed, bend’ (see gheb). Thraco-Dacian origin.
Derivatives: agâmbeală, agâmbat.
agina (vb., I) (reg., Olt.) – to cease, to stop.
It seems to be a compound form a verbal root gin- prefixed with the preposition a. I could not identify any cognate in other Indo-European languages. Unknown origin.
agonisị (Aromanain agunisescu, Megleno-Romanian angunesés) (vb., IV) – 1. to work hard, to toil (obs.); 2. to gain; 3. to save.
Medio-Greek αγονίζομαι ‘to fight’ (Roesler, 563; DAR; Cioranescu, 134).
Derivatives: agoniseală, agonisită, agonisitor.
agrịş(n., masc.) – gooseberry bush (Ribes grossularia), barberry bush (Berberis vulagre).
Hungarian egres ‘gooseberry’ (Gáldi, 82; Cioranescu, 136), itself from MHG agras< Old French aigras< Latin acrus (cf. Cioranescu).
Berneker (2, 5) argues that OCS agres, Czech agrest, Polishagrest are deriving from Italian agresto ‘unripe grapes’. According to Miklosich (Fremdw., 73), Albanaian grestë as well as Serbian greš, ogrešta derive from Italian as well; cf. Russian agrest, agrus ‘agriş’. According to Vasmer (I, 5) the Russian forms are borrowed from Polish, Ukrainian agrest, which is also borrowed from Italian agresto.
The forms presented above do not seem to derive from the same source, namely some of them may derive from Italian and others from Romanian. Italian agrestoseems to be cognate with Romnianaguridă ‘wild grapes’ found in Albanian as well. It is obvious that Latin acrus ‘sour’ and Romanianagriş derive from the same root. There are in Romanian other lexical elements deriving from the same root: acriş (dial.) ‘yoghurt’ and măcriş (variant macriş) ‘sorrel’ due to their taste. Hungarian egres is a loanword from Romanian (see acru ‘sour’, aguridă ‘wild grapes’).
Derivatives: agrişă.
ạgru(dial.) (Aromanian and Megleno-Romanian agru) (n., neut.) – field.
Latin agrum (acc. of ager„field”) (Puşcariu, 38; Candrea-Densusianu, 21; REW, 276). Latin agerderives from PIE *ag’ro-s (Walde, 1, 22). The root has derivatives in many Indo-European languages: cf. Umbrian ager ‘id’, Sanskrit ajrah ‘id’, Greek αγρός ‘id’, Gothic akrs ‘id’, OHG ackar „id”, NHG Acker ‘id’. The form agruis used only in some dialects, including Aromanian and Megleno-Romanian. The usual form in today’s Daco-Romanian is ogor (see ogor).
agụdă(n., fem.) – mullberry.
OCS *agoda(Hasdeu, 534). The Old Church Slavonic *agoda is not attested, but it was reconstructed from Serbian jagoda ‘wild strawberry’ and therefore the hypothesis cannot be accepted, since one does not know what the origin of Serbian jagoda is. On the other hand, Romanian agudă cannot derive from Serbianjagoda, which would give in Romanian *iagodă.
Romanian agudă derives from the same root as agrişand aguridă (see agriş, aguridă), due to their sour taste (see acru).
agurạ (vb., I) (obs., dial.) – to predict, to forecast.
Latin a(u)gurare (Densusianu, Rom., 28, 61; Puşcariu, 39; Candrea-Densusianu, 23, REW, 784; DAR; Cioranescu, 139). The word is preserved in western Transylvania, only.
Cioranescu rejects Pascu’s hypothesis (1, 178) that Aromanian ugure ‘prophecy’ is not inherited, but a loanword from Turkish which borrowed it from Neo-Greek γουρί < Latin augurium. Latin origin.
agurịdă(variant acrid (obs.), Aromanian aguridă, Megleno-Romanian guridă) (n., fem.) – wild vine, wild grapes.
Medio-Greek αγουρίδα from άγουρος ‘green’ (Miklosich, Fremdw. 73; Cioranescu, 140); cf. Albanian aguridhë ‘id’, Bulgarian agurida ‘id’. The Medio-Greek forms invoked by Miklosich are not attested in this language (cf. Lampe). The variant acrid is a derivative of acru ‘sour’. It must be of Thraco-Illyrian origin, being present in Albanian and Bulgarian as well. It is related to agudă (see acru,agudă).
Derivatives: agurijoară „rose moss” (Portulaca grandifora).
ạgust(variants gust, gustar, agustru, Aromanian avgustu, Megleno-Romanian avgust) (n., masc.) – the month of August.
Vulgar Latin *agustus(Puşcariu, 40; Candrea-Densusianu, 24; REW, 786); cf. Albanian gusht ‘id’.Present day form august is a modern adaptation dating form 19th century.
ah (variant a, aha) (interj.) – an interjection expressing pain.
The variants a and aha are expressing surprise or satisfaction. According Cioranescu (142), it is an imitative formation; cf. Sanskrit aho ‘interjection expressing as surprise or pain’. Both may be associates with PIE *ā ‘exclamation expressing wonder’ (IEW, 1) (see a¹).
ai(Aromanian, Megleno-Romanian al’u, Istro-Romanian ol’u) (dial.) (n., masc.) – garlic.
Latin alium ‘garlic’ (Puşcariu, 47; Candrea-Densusianu; REW, 366; Cioranescu, 145). The root is found in Albanian and Sanskrit as well. cf. Albanian aj ‘id’, Sanskrit alu-h, alukam ‘root, bulb’.
All these forms derive from PIE *alu-, alō- ‘plant, bitter bulb’ (IEW, 33). Romanian ai is used only in some dialects of Transylvania of Daco-Romanian and in the Balkan dialects.
aicị (variant aci,Aromanianaoá, aţia ‘there’) (adv.) – here.
Latin *eccum-hic (Puşcariu, 12; Candrea-Densusianu, 8; REW, 4129). Panromanic. Similar forms are found in other Indo-European languages of different groups; cf. Umbrian essu, Oscan eks-, uk, Lithuanian čia ‘here’, and Sanskrit iha ‘here’. The particle a- is a deictic prefix, as in other Romanian words (see a³, acolo, acel).
Derivatives: acilea ‘id’ (cf. acolea).
aịdoma(adv.) – 1. same, identical; 2. real, indeed.
OCS vidomŭ ‘visible’ < OCS videti ‘to see’, which turned in Romanian into an adverb having added a prothetic a (Cihac, 2, 2; Cioranescu, 149).
The Old Church Slavonic etymon invoked by Cihac is not attested (cf. Djačenko). On the other hand, this hypothesis cannot explain the initial a. However, similar forms are found in Sanskrit and Lithuanian; cf. Sanskrit aviš ‘open before one’s eyes’, Lithuanian avytis ‘which can be seen’.
Obviously, all these froms are derivatives of the PIE *ụedi- „to see, to perceive” (IEW, 1125) (see vedea ‘to see’).
aieptạ (vb., I) – 1. to throw oneself forward; 2. to adjust, to smooth.
Vulgar Latin *aiectare from Latin eiectare ‘to throw’ (Puşcariu, 42; Candrea-Densusianu, 27; Cioranescu, 151). Diculescu (Elementele, 463) is dubious about this hypothesis and, instead he thinks that it derives from Greek ιάκτω ‘to throw’. Diculescu’s hypothesis seems to be more plausible, but the correct Greek form isίάπτω, which according to Boisaque (364), derives from PIE *(ii)-iaqŭ-io.Boisaque considers it of obscure origin, a loanword in ancient Greek, and according to him is cognate to Latin jacio ‘to throw’. It seems that the Greek verb is of Thracian or Illyrian origin, where PIE *kʷ turned into a p in these languages. (seecuptor ‘oven’, noapte ‘night’). With the second meaning, it seems to be a different verb all together. It seems to be of Thraco-Dacian origin.
aiẹvea(Aromanian aevea, naevea) (adv.) – 1. real, which looks real; 2. truly, indeed.
OCS javiti ‘to show, to present’ (Cihac, 2, 153; Berneker, 34; Cioranescu, 152); cf. OCS ave ‘obvious’ (Berneker, 2, 34) which seems to be a cognate to Romanianaievea.
I have to mention that the etymon invoked by Cihac is not attested (cf. Blagova, Djačenko). Cihac associates it with a aivi ‘o appear, to show’. On the other hand, Romanianaievea has a cognate in Lithuanian ovijus, ovitis ‘to appear in a dream’ (see ivi).
aiụrea(Aromanian al’urea, Megleno-Romanian l’urea, Istro-Romanian al’ure) (adv.) – 1. elsewhere, somewhere, far away; 2. randomly, which does not make sense.
Latin aliubi ‘other, another, someone else, something else’ (Creţu, 305; Candrea-Densusianu, 29; Cioranescu, 155); cf. French ailleurs, Old Spanish alubre, Portuguese alhur. The meaning of Latin aliubi is different and it makes difficult to be the etymon of Romanian aiurea. Furthermore, it is not the right etymon for the Romance languages forms, but a Vulgar Latin *aliore (REW, 347; Gamillscheg, 21), although Cioranescu (155) disagrees arguing that the etymon of Romanian aiurea is Latin *(vo)let, but his hypothesis does not make any sense.
Similar forms with the same meaning are found in some Geramnic languages; cf. Gothic aljar ‘elesewhere, somewhere’, Old English ellor, Old Norse ellior‘elsewhere’.

Schmidt (1962, 70; cf. Lehmann, 28) argues that the Germanic forms derive from a Proto-Germanic *aljōr, which is (almost) identical to the Vulgar Latinaliorewhich is considered to be the etymon of the Romance forms. In other words, the so-called Vulgar Latin form is rather a Pre-Roman etymon.

Schmidt (1962, 70; cf. Lehmann, 28) argues that the Germanic forms derive from a Proto-Germanic *aljōr, which is (almost) identical to the Vulgar Latinaliorewhich is considered to be the etymon of the Romance forms. In other words, the so-called Vulgar Latin form is rather a Pre-Roman etymon.